Kipp, who leafleted at the Women of Faith Conference in Ft.
Lauderdale, writes:

Leafleting went very well as far as handing out pamphlets went. I
handed out the box of 300 in an hour.

Some were concerned that I was a Jehovah's Witness, but most were
quite receptive. I found out that the best way to approach people was
with "I have nothing to sell!" That generally got a chuckle. And then I
asked them if they would like a totally free pamphlet on: 1) a
Christian-based diet or 2) dietary information. When I just said that it
was dietary, many turned away until I added that it was Christian-based.
On the other hand, if I said it was Christian-based, some looked
offended when it was about being a vegetarian.

I learned to add "This is from one perspective." That proved to be a
powerful statement because that did not offend Christians who choose to
eat meat, and it's also accurate in that Romans talks about the freedom
to be free of dietary restrictions.

I also emphasized, if engaged in conversation, that the information
in the pamphlet is accurate, but it's up to each individual to decide
how to handle it.

This passage describes Jesus, when 12 years old, studying the
Scriptures among the men in the temple. One remarkable aspect of this
story is that it highlights Jesus learning and growing. The story
relates that Jesus was “sitting among the teachers, listening to them
and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at his
understanding and his answers.” Jesus was not born omniscient – he
needed to learn about the letter and the intent of the law. Indeed, as
Jesus learned from others, he “increased in wisdom and in stature”
(2:52). I think that this has important implications.

If Jesus’ teachings were tantamount to “channeling” for God, his
teachings might or might not make sense to humans. God’s ways are not
necessarily human ways. If Jesus learned from fellow humans, then his
teachings would reflect the understanding he gained from other people.
It would be reasonable to expect Jesus’ teachings to accord with human
understanding and wisdom. It also follows that we should be skeptical of
religious authorities whose teachings “in the name of Christ” violate
common sense or the notions of love, justice, and mercy that Jesus
endorsed. It has always been tempting for religious authorities to
affirm the self-interest of their target audience, playing for support
and power by appealing to the prejudices and desires of the masses. We
need to identify and reject such messages. A good rule of thumb is we
should be on guard for messages that we find attractive that also
endorse harming other individuals, particularly when that harm is
justified by appeals to “the nation,” “purity,” or “God’s law.”

I think an implication of this story is that we should not follow
religious dictates blindly. If what religious authorities tell us
violate our fundamental sense of justice and mercy, we need to
prayerfully reflect on how Jesus would have regarded these messages.
Though we need to remain mindful of the universal tendency to impose our
values and beliefs onto our scriptures, those values and beliefs can be
helpful guideposts as we seek to model our lives on Jesus’ life and
teachings.